THE REPUBLIC v. KWABENA GYASI
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Accused, Kwabena Gyasi, was charged under section 2(1) of the Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement, and Sanctions) Act, 1990 (PNDCL 236) for possessing cannabis without lawful authority. Despite pleading not guilty, the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he had knowledge of the drugs found in his kiosk. The court found him guilty, citing precedents and evidence from witnesses, and sentenced him to ten years imprisonment.
JUDGMENT
It is provided under section (2) 1 of the NARCOTIC DRUGS (CONTROL, ENFORCEMENT AND SANCTIONS) ACT, 1990 PNDCL 236 as follows:
“2 (1) A person who, without lawful authority, the proof of which lies on that person, has possession or control of a narcotic drug commits an offence."
The accused person before me was charged under this law as follows:
STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
POSSESSING NARCOTIC DRUGS WITHOUT LAWFUL AUTHORITY: SECTION 2 C) OF NARCOTIC DRUGS (CONTROL, ENFORCEMENT AND SANCTION) ACT, 1990 PNDCL 236.
PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
KWABENA GYASI: AGED 27:- For that you on the 29th day of June, 2014 at Agona in the Ashanti Region and within the jurisdiction of this Court without lawful authority, did have in your possession Fourteen (14) pieces of compressed dried leaves and quantity of seeds all suspected to be a narcotic drug.
He pleaded not guilty to the charge and is now standing trial. A summary of the facts are that whilst the police were conducting a search in the accused person's room and kiosk after they had received information that some suspected armed robbers were hiding in Agona Ashanti, they found a black and white polythene bag containing 14 pieces of dried leaves suspected to Cannabis . The accused was handed over to the Drugs Law and Enforcement Unit and he claimed ownership in his cautioned statement to the Police. The exhibits tested positive for cannabis after the same had been tested by the Ghana Standards Authority.
In this trial, the prosecution is enjoined by sections 11(2) and 13(1) of the Evidence Act, 1975 NRCD 323 to prove the guilt of the accused person beyond every reasonable doubt. From the wording of section 2(1) of PNDCL 236, the following ingredients must be established to the requisite degree of proof before the prosecution can secure a conviction:
1. The accused had custody or control of the drugs
2. He knew of the presence of the drugs ; and
3. He knew of the nature of the drugs possessed.
This means that apart from proving physical possession, the prosecution must prove legal possession which entails knowledge of the nature of the drugs.
A case in point is Ellis Tamakloe v The Republic (Unreported) Criminal Appeal J3/2/2009, 17/02/2010 SC where Ansah JSC stated with approval the Ghanaian view on possession of narcotic drugs as expressed by Ollenu JSC in Amartey v The State (1964) GLR 256 at 261 thus:
“What is the possession proof of which without more makes a person guilty of an offence under the sec